Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
MSNBCW 45
MSNBC 44
CSPAN 15
KQED (PBS) 9
WETA 8
KRCB (PBS) 6
WHUT (Howard University Television) 5
CNNW 3
CSPAN2 3
CNN 2
KNTV (NBC) 2
WBAL (NBC) 2
WRC (NBC) 2
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 177
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 177 (some duplicates have been removed)
at winning that nomination. mitt romney had also run in 2008. remember? he lost to john mccain that year. but that year, 2008, also was not john mccain's first effort at winning the republican presidential nomination. he had run before as well. he had run in the year 2000, when he lost to george w. bush. and while that john mccain campaign and his loss that year has mostly been remembered for the egregiously racist dirty tricks played against john mccain in the south carolina primary that year, that's mostly what we think of when we think of him losing to george w. bush that year, now what is starting to become the more salient thing about that losing run, about that losing attempt at winning the republican presidential nomination, what seems more salient now is who john mccain's national co-chair was for that run. it was republican senator chuck hagel. there he is. you can see him in the little circle on the left there. with john mccain's entourage as john mccain was getting ready to launch his presidential bid back in 2000. this is the same chuck hagel who is president obama's nominee
and fellow vietnam veteran john mccain jump all over hagel for opposing the surge in iraq. >> were you correct or incorrect when you said the search would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam? correct or incorrect? yes or no? are you going to answer the question, senator hagel? the question is, were you right or wrong? i would like to answer whether you were right or wrong. and you are free to elaborate. >> i am not going to give you a yes or no answer -- >> let the record show that you refuse to answer the question. >> he finally gave the answer he wanted to give. >> i saw the suffering and consequences of a war. i did second think the search. would this be worth the sacrifice? we lost almost 1200 dead americans during that period was it required, necessary? >> how much of that exchange was political, how much was personal, and how much was related to our defense policy, mark? >> 92, 11, 13. [laughter] a lot of it was personal. one could not watch those hearings without feeling that there were a lot of personal grudges, even vendettas, being settl
." >>> good evenly iing. i'm chris matthews in washington. let me start with this. why is john mccain so gri? why america? why are we fighting the vietnam war all over again in the united states senate. the have it tree troll against chuck hagel. is it about lyndon johnson's inability to win that war or end it? what is it that burns so deeply in john mccain today? for some reason he wants to play it again and again in iraq and afterno afghanistan and again in iran. we look at the resentment burning in john mccain's heart. it's not against george w. bush and his political henchmen who tried to stay mccain's reputation in 2000 but a guy who fear and rallied against wounds just like he did. chuck hagel, a nightmare, by the way, whose flashbacks must haunt still the heart still of john sydney mccain. both are msnbc analysts. both of you, sir, and lady, are younger than me, but i must tell you i'm absolutely convinced we're watching a flashback. watch this. he did a long angry windup before he launched into his first so-called question which was really an indictment. it included putdowns as well
the senate armed services committed tee this week. is senator john mccain grilling hagel about hagel's opposition to the surge in iraq in 2007. >> were you correct in your judgment. >> i would defer that to history. >> when you were right or wrong about the surge. >> i'll explain why i played those comments. >> i want to know if you were right or wrong. that is a direct question. i expect a direct answer. >> senator hagel explained he opposed the surge in iraq because it cost nearly 1200 american lives. >> i saw the consequences and the suffering and the horror of war. so i did question a surge. i always ask the question, is this going to be worth the sacrifice? because there will be sacrifice. >> that was hagel's emphasis on the cost factor. my question is this. his emphasis on the cost factor in military decisions, does it serve as a dodge to senator mccain's bullet? or did he mean this completely from the heart? and if he did, isn't he exactly the man we want over at the department of defense? >> he was talking about the cost of lives. >> that's correct. >> and i think in that exc
. gwen: john mccain was not talking to be population. he was talking about hispanic voters. karen, forgive me. 2007 sounds like an echo of some place we've been before. >> yeah, the things that people are talking about now -- enhanced security on the border. cracking down on hiring of illegal immigrants, a legalization program, all of those things were actually done, written into the law in 1986 and i looked back and looked at the signing ceremony where president reagan declareed that future generations of americans will be faithful for our efforts to humanely regain control of our boarders. that law -- borders. that law, the last immigration reform that this country attempted actually left the country the exact same problems it had then, only worse. back then there are three million to five million illegal immigrants. now there are 1 1. rather than settling this question of who gets to be an american, it's now more enflamed than it has been in memory and it's in part because of that law and its failures that i think we are where we are today. >> as i understand it, the decree tea
for please to come in legally so they come from illegally. >> there are some familiar faces. john mccain has been on this issue before. it's not surprising but the real fresh face here is marco rubio. he seems to have spent a lot of time going to conservative talk radio to soften the ground. how important is this to him and how important is he to the whole issue? >> marco rubio is a really interesting player, in part because of his own story. he is the son of legal immigrants. >> from cuban to florida. >> right. he is an icon among conservatives who do see him as the future and he has a way of talking about this issue where he had rush limbaugh essentially eating out of his hand so i think that a lot of republicans do look to marco rubio has -- as sort of finding the path but statement you have the 12345r9 from louisiana saying -- senator from louisiana saying marco rubio is just naive. gwen: what about the president's role? they beat him to the punch in the announcement. he went to las vegas the next day and say me too and we hope they mean it. is he waiting for congress to take the lead? >
start with this, why is john mccain so angry? 40 years after the vietnam p.o.w.s came home the most famous of them is angrier than ever. we are we fighting vietnam again in the u.s. senate. the ticked-off hagel, is it just for show? the basic unfairness of vietnam itself that some went and some didn't? is it about lyndon johnson's inability to win the war or end it? what is it about john mccain that seems to excite those who know nothing about vietnam. well tonight we dig into the deep well of resentment burning in john mccain's patriotic heart. a resentment not against the north vietnamese who imprisoned and tortured him, not against george w. bush and his political henchmen who tried to stain mccain's reputation. but just like he did, in the same army of america's long nightmare in vietnam. i'm joined by david corn with "mother jones" and joy reed with the grio. i have to tell you i'm convinced we're watching a flashback. watch this, here's senator john mccain, he did a long, angry wind-up before he launched into his first so-called question. it was really an indictment for former
"hardball." ♪ >>> i'm chris matthews in washington. let me start with this. why is john mccain so angry? 40 years after the vietnam p.o.w.s came home, the most famous of them is angrier than ever. why is america, why are we fighting the vietnam war all over again in the united states senate? the ticked off vitriol against chuck hagel. what is it about is? is it for show? is it about something hagel said in the cloakroom? is it the unfairness of vietnam itself that some went and sond didn't. is it about johnson's inability to win that war or end it. what burns so deeply in john mccain these days? it seems to excite those who knew nothing about vietnam but want to replay it. we big into the deep well of resentment purning in john mccain's patriotic heart. a resentment not against the north vietnamese who imprisoned and tr toured him all those years, no the against george w. bush and his political henchmen who tried to stain mccain's reputation back in 2000, but against a guy who fought against fear and ralliesed against wounds just like he did in the same army of america's long nightmare in v
john mccain. i told you it would come to this and now we've got the proof on camera. a party that spits at its leaders listens only to the loudest, angriest person in the back row. boehner is nothing to this crowd. it never heard of kantor. mitch mcconnell, a nobody. what matters to the republican far right are the few to dare to be even further right. now the huffington post editorial director. the 2013 version of john mccain version took on his constituents who looked like a room full of right wing 2010 mccains with their anti-immigrant build a fence talk. here's a bit of his exchange, if you want to call it that, with angry right wing tea partiers. >> why didn't the army go down there and stop 'em? because the only thing that stops 'em, i'm afraid to say, and it's too damn bad, but is a gun. that's all that will stop 'em. >> the border is 2,000 miles long, sir. i don't know how many troops and army people you think would have been required. i don't know how many you think would be required, but i'll give you expert information that shows you that probably maybe you're talking about t
the money. >> john mccain chuck hagel lots of drama. >> comedy before the superbowl weekend and nobody found it funny. >> the can we say is were you right or wrong? that's a pretty straight forward question. i would like the answer whether you were right or wrong and then you are free to elaborate. >> michael hastings, you have something for us about football, don't you? >> yes in advance of superbowl weekend, no one found it funny. >> what about gay guys, any approach you? >> i don't do the gay guys. >> are there any on the 49ers? >> lots of drama between chuck hagel and john mccain. and it's go time. [ ♪ theme ♪ ] >> all right. the big story of the day today has to do with the excel key stone pipeline. it's been coming up again and again. the obama administration has refused to sign the permits to allow for the complete construction of the pipeline. for those of you who don't know what it is, it's a $7 billion project that would pump more than 800,000-barrels of toxic tar sands crude each day from alberta through america's agricultural heart lands to remainries in the gulf. environment
of eight, because john mccain does not like that term. it is the group of eight. i give him a huge credit for his work, and marco rubio, and lindsey gramm, and jeff like. this might not just be an opportunity to fix immigration, which would be huge, but an opportunity for us to demonstrate to the country that finally we can do something that is hard, and we can do it in a bipartisan way. >> when you think about it and you stepped out these principles, including finding a track for citizens to get legal -- but you bump them back behind those that are there. i have read through them. but what point, when you get into deeper specifics -- i have read through the colorado compact and what the group of eight have put on the table. it reads as principals. it does not read specifically. when do you begin losing the bipartisan flamboyance? >> there will be bumps in the road. it will not be an easy thing to do. if it worries you -- were easy to do, it would have been done a long time ago. there are parties ready to get this done, who have heard from home the same things i am hearing. i think we hav
. senator john mccain took the lead and set the tone early on. >> our concerns pertain to the quality of your professional judgment and your worldview on critical areas of national security, including security in the middle east. >> john mccain did not always have grave concerns about chuck hagel's worldview. in fact, he named chuck hagel a co-chair of his 2000 presidential campaign. >> my fellow americans, i introduce you to a great republican, a great american leader, my friend, john mccain! >> how come mccain didn't get that kind of greeting, huh? or hagel, should i say. not only were hagel and mccain good buddies, john mccain wanted to give hagel the exact job he's up for right now. he told voters in new hampshire, "there's a lot of people that could be secretary of state -- secretary of defense. one of them i think is senator chuck hagel." but mccain sure has a different view of hagel today. he still can't get over hagel's opposition to the surge in iraq. >> do you stand by that -- those comments, senator hagel? >> well, senator, i stand by them because i made them. >> were you r
news led by i guess the king kong. what is it in white elephant? john mccain who has nothing possibly better to do besides become a total media whore and just continue to be like i am going to find reasons to get on television and get mad. you know he started up on hagel. we are going to get to that. before but i really think chuck hagel has a couple of outstanding moments. he had some rough ones too. >> he did. >> he had some rough ones. >> it was not a flawness hearing hearing. >> i am not going to say it's all roses. there was some dob pooh in there, too. let's take at listen to his opening start. >> i am on the record. i am on the record on many issues. but no one individual, no one individual quote, no individual statement defines me. >> i love that. i think he really did a good job of sort of crystalizing what it is his job is. you know, when you are secretary of defense, yes, you are part of the decision-making team for the national security in this country. but at the end of the day, you don't operate in a vacuum. you know, you operat
a letter to senators john mccain, lindsey gramm, kelly ayotte, who have been demanding more information. they hoped from soundness yesterday or the day before that they would be able to change minds and make these centers -- senators vote yes. there is information that republicans say they want. it also seems like they were unhappy with his pick, they wanted -- wanted a different tack, and they did not -- they did not want to be conciliatory about it. host: 1 vote for present. why did they go that way? guest: senator hatch of voted present. it beats me why he did. you either vote yes or no. there is a rumor that he did not believe in the filibuster. if you do not believe in the filibuster, you should probably vote yes. republican leadership was actively whipping. that would be the reason. of the people who voted to block it, one was center collins -- senator collins from the northeast. also, senator johanns from nebraska, who was one of senator hagel's colleagues from nebraska. host: what happens from here in terms of having a defense secretary? guest: i think the white house is irritat
, then people don't forget that. >> that was republican senator john mccain on fox news yesterday explaining why exactly he is participating in filibustering chuck hagel's nomination to be secretary of defense. he says chuck hagel is too darn disagreeable. so says john mccain. quote, in a heated dispute over immigration law overhaul, mccain screamed f you at john cornyn who had been raising concerns about the legislation. this is chicken -- stuff, mccain snapped at cornyn. are you calling me stupid chuck grassley once said? no, replied senator mccain. i'm calling you an -- jerk. at a gop meeting last fall, mccain erupted out of the blue at the respected budget chairman pete domenici, quote, only an -- would put together a budget like this. a speech about all his years in the senate through all the heated debates no one had ever called him that. another man might have taken a moment to check his temper, but mccain went on, i wouldn't call you that unless you really were that. >> you can disagree, but if you're disagreeable, then people don't forget that. >> ah, the arbiter of disagreeable. it is
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 177 (some duplicates have been removed)